Re: [arch-d] IANA program redefinition

Martin Thomson <> Sat, 13 February 2021 10:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 816C53A0E63 for <>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:35:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.12
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.12 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=lkfJXvI/; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=BPcQKjga
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jhISgCOchivg for <>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:35:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC9463A0E62 for <>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:35:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C0B5C0093 for <>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 05:35:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imap10 ([]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 13 Feb 2021 05:35:25 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=0crhM xK7IO+UWXkaa84xF/lJWCyFue8btt9v2l+orpc=; b=lkfJXvI/CVs+8GTzuDgED Ms+LclYdhovzxJFU7YZ4I/99arOXCY86GAd8YZYV9+9s0Nw8Wo2TMXJY0zj1oPyw W6UVDGhc4eO93pPerxCD9kFbZHO0+yDcxYgpA3pIRhbHUqCU4L17EZnQo0GVnPOT X02KStLN0kz7+6HgFOD6Bn7UJrm5AdASmm9vZTKhC/x3erSzPUbUZNqzdDWYBJhn 82Ojb+v6CCVVH1wfxErwLUp5leXz/07qJ2pHTK+8SEItqUlhUPxTngj8SJfx/OdS HooNTVVmHaGaUv+zfvtgbI+ht0XEOGSpS8PW47CfmWVSefMp1tely3N3SCdicixg w==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=0crhMxK7IO+UWXkaa84xF/lJWCyFue8btt9v2l+or pc=; b=BPcQKjgaFdYrB959hwXGSIzkLVhbJB/6D77Xvaruz/JJM72Cx0XBe75RV IfKZO4nJQDMREIWHYNiksA+6ND55cguShpcyyVou7fe+jhxUZRajW91dNiComlCL vWLjHKylp9KxLwLHqypCI4kVyKlmu5eF/8O5iC4yPnXh1BPvigyPqgsx+gHZsx8G XOOUpzM1aVHVUIUx/zvR4XJ5D2zcsr9BRT4K1wGHEbuoJGugkeDhra11AqUa9Byk H8Q+Lhy2xjUcvyYItmP3W54JGtnL3LspfmD0an+aPSY1ULBdlKONUrg3TTMaA+Cz q1NXFiPec5P3Br/KvS4tdKNmG0HNg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:bKsnYATBYn0Apn8PVc4giezC-rjj0o9OrttTFanSIcoToIfDS8DH2Q> <xme:bKsnYNziG8zDkxwO64FrU-cimaEYt8xvQWdroKbCitnf9l9BCiCx6s4jZwSFC8pQt 615ixS2Z4ZWC8SsCX0>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrieefgdduvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqh ertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeduheeugfdvffdvleefud evveeuledugedttdelvdfhgeevgeetledthffftdettdenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhf rdhorhhgpdhirggsrdhorhhgpdhitggrnhhnrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgv th
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:bKsnYN2X4dc8DgMLMht3Rzd6vmSQzYbydePkiElQ0fZd8WzsYZJIVg> <xmx:bKsnYECjHYRYlARcYShyVYkLALxs5k43_uKqTvOzmzukOOcjI8oB3Q> <xmx:bKsnYJjGjRw1akQlhi6Gelp0bQ8dVyf00TKUIBjyDRc0FqoSxz5o7g> <xmx:basnYEvIgG0D6fr6gsCoyRlerdAajXccFQLzEL7nuOUR1v1TW_ij5Q>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id A3B864E0080; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 05:35:24 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-141-gf094924a34-fm-20210210.001-gf094924a
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 21:34:49 +1100
From: "Martin Thomson" <>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] IANA program redefinition
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 10:35:30 -0000

Hi Jari,

I see a lot of people who are nominally chairs of their respective groups here.  Did those involved discuss appointing a delegate other than the (likely already busy) chair of the organization?  We tried really hard not to have the chair do everything a few years ago, but I'm seeing a return to that recently (not just the IAB, but the IESG also in this case).  Maybe that's just circumstance.  Wanted to check.

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021, at 02:46, Jari Arkko wrote:
> Hi,
> You may be aware that the IAB has been redefining its program structure 
> [1]. You may also be aware that we have a small, sleepy program for 
> helping the IAB deal with big strategic issues on IANA [2]. We also 
> have an informal team of IANA and IETF people that discuss periodically 
> to discuss statistics, and provide suggestions on various improvements 
> or issues. Fortunately, there hasn't been any recent need to invoke the 
> program. There hasn't really been any strategic issues after the 
> transition was done and the one NTIA notice of inquiry was answered in 
> 2018 [3]. Equally fortunately, the IANA process keeps running extremely 
> smoothly, so the informal team has mostly been happy confirming that 
> things are good, as well working on some improvements, discussing 
> operational or technical topics that have arisen, etc. Neither group 
> has any formal role, e.g., all decisions and contracts are taken by the 
> relevant  formal entities, such as the LLC, Trust, IAB, and PTI. PTI is 
> the ICANN-affiliated organisation that runs the IANA Functions service 
> [4].
> Anyway, back to the IAB's effort on redefining its program structure. 
> What were previously called programs are now either Technical Programs 
> or Administrative Support Groups. In addition, the restructuring is an 
> opportunity to review existing programs and update/close/recreate them 
> as needed. With this in mind, Mirja had asked us to evaluate the 
> structure. It hasn't been crystal clear what different groups we have, 
> the need for the strategic assistance is very different than it was 
> when the transition was going on, and various people changes have also 
> happened.
> Russ, Michelle, me, the IETF-IANA team, and the program and the IAB 
> have discussed this, and thought that it would make sense to update the 
> charter, and to consolidate the program and the team in one group. 
> Please see the proposed charter below.
> Thoughts? If you have comments, please respond by Feb 23rd so that we 
> can process the matter on the IAB call on the 24th.
> Jari (on behalf of the program & IAB)
> ——
> Purpose
> The background for the IETF-IANA group are the IANA functions for the
> Internet and the IETF, as specified in the IANA MoU (RFC2860) and
> related agreements between stakeholders. At the IETF, the formal
> responsibility for the relationship lies in four entities:
> * The IAB that is tasked with IANA oversight
> * The LLC that is tasked with managing the contracts
> * The IETF Trust that holds the rights for related domains and trademarks
> * The CCG, which provides advice and guidance to the IETF Trust
> Today, the IANA functions are provided by Public Technical Identifiers
> (PTI), a purpose-built organization for providing the IANA functions
> to the community. PTI is an affiliate of ICANN.
> The IETF-IANA group organizes regular meetings to provide advice,
> primarily to the IAB and PTI. The group has participants from both
> IETF and PTI sides. The group is expected to review the publicly
> available IANA performance statistics, discuss specific issues that
> have come up in the protocol parameter service, provide input on
> proposed yearly updates to the IANA Functions SLA, or any other
> similar topics.
> However, the group is not responsible for daily operational
> guidance, and does not have any formal role in contracts relating to
> the IANA functions. The advice that it provides is input to the
> relevant entities that perform IANA functions (PTI) or provide
> oversight (the IAB), but may indirectly be useful also for those in
> charge of contract management on either side.
> The group co-leads will review and update membership yearly
> together with the IAB.
> Results and References
>   * RFC 2860: IANA MoU
>   * RFC 6220: Defining the Role and Function of IETF Protocol Parameter 
> Registry Operator
>   * RFC 7500: Principles for Operation of Internet Assigned Numbers 
> Authority (IANA) Registries 
>   * RFC 8090: Appointment Procedures for the IETF Representatives to 
> the Community Coordination Group (CCG) 
>   * IETF Trust agreement on IANA 
>   * ICANN-IETF Service Level Agreements
>   * Information on IANA performance
> Members
>   * Michelle Cotton (Group co-Lead & PTI Protocol Parameters Engagement 
> Sr. Manager)
>   * Russ Housley (Group co-Lead)
>   * Jari Arkko  (IAB Lead)
>   * Mirja Kühlewind (IAB Chair)
>   * Lars Eggert (IETF Chair)
>   * Jay Daley (LLC Executive Director) 
>   * Kim Davies (PTI President) 
>   * Harald Alvestrand (IETF-ICANN board liaison)
>   (* Other members may be added based on an ongoing check of their 
> availability)
> ——
> References
> [1] 
> []
> [2 ] []
> [3] 
> []
> [4] []
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list